US Rep. Richard Neal cautions executive order on administrative law judges could politicize appointments

Posted Jul 11, 2018

Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass., listens as President Donald Trump speaks during a meeting with members of the House Ways and Means committee in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, Tuesday, Sept. 26, 2017, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

U.S. Rep. Richard Neal, D-Springfield, took issue this week with the White House's decision to modify the process for selecting federal regulatory judges, cautioning that it could allow appointments to be based on ideology and political orientation instead of merit or fitness for office.

Neal, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, criticized President Donald Trump for taking executive action Tuesday to except administrative law judges -- who oversee much of the federal government's regulatory efforts -- from competitive examination and service selection procedures, giving agency heads more discretion over such appointments.

Arguing that the competitive selection process allows these judges to be selected based on merit, neutrality and fitness for office, the congressman cautioned that the order could undercut impartiality and lead to campaign donors or industry officials being appointed to such roles.

The Springfield Democrat pointed to the Social Security Administration as an example of an agency that could be impacted by the Trump administration's order.

Offering that the agency's administrative law judges are tasked with hearing appeals from workers who have applied for benefits but were rejected by a lower-level authority, the congressman raised concerns that politically based appointees could "result in millions of Americans being denied the benefits they've earned through decades of hard work."

"Allowing the appointment of judges who are big campaign donors, beholden to industry, or otherwise unqualified will result in unfair, biased rulings that harm ordinary Americans ... When it comes to filling these consequential positions, candidates' intellect and integrity should be the rule -- not ideology and fealty to a particular administration," he said in a statement.

Neal called the executive order "yet another example of President Trump putting special interests and loyalists ahead of American families' well-being."

The congressman's office noted that of the nearly 2,000 administrative law judges employed by the federal government, about 85 percent serve at the Social Security Administration, while the rest are spread across agencies ranging from the Department of Health and Human Services to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Trump signed an executive order Tuesday to give agency heads more choice over the selection of administrative law judges, who make rulings that impact regulatory actions across the federal government.

The order follows a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down the Securities and Exchange Commission's system of using in-house judges to decide conflicts as unconstitutional, Politico reported.

The high court found that administrative law judges are "officers" of the United States and subject to the Constitution's Appointments Clause, which requires all officers to be appointed by the president, courts of law or the heads of departments, according to the news outlet.